CHARLESTON, W. Va. – Community groups are harshly criticizing legislation they say would hurt West Virginia streams and drinking water, and they feel ordinary residents are being left out of the legislative process.
Angie Rosser, executive director of the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, says at a recent public hearing, more than two dozen people spoke against Senate Bill 687, nicknamed the "coal bill." But when the bill came up before a committee, she says the only person called to speak was an industry lobbyist.
"That sends a strong message to us that the voices of West Virginians, and the stakeholders who rely on clean and healthy streams are left out," Rosser said.
Senate Bill 687 ends a requirement to count insects and invertebrates when studying stream health, which opponents say paves the way for more pollution from mining.
Supporters of the bill argue that reducing clean-water regulations would bring economic growth and jobs. But Rosser says her group hasn't seen any evidence that a single job would be created.
Critics charge House Bill 2506, the so-called "cancer creek" bill, would permit more pollution in surface waters by changing how the state measures baseline stream flows. And House Bill 2811 would further reduce regulations on storage tanks.
Raleigh County resident Junior Walk, says the bills would speed up declines he's already seeing in water quality.
"I'm a fairly young person, you know, and I've seen the freshwater mussels die off in the Coal River," he said. "You can't find a freshwater mussel in Coal River anymore, and you used to find them all the time when I was a young kid. We used to eat them."
According to Rosser, public outcry is the best cure when lawmakers ignore the concerns of regular folks. She says the Elk River chemical spill three years ago brought people out to demand more water-quality protections.
"Since then, it has been that chipping away from that progress we made," she added. "And our fear is, when and where is the next disaster going to happen? And why haven't we learned these lessons?"
Rosser says an online petition asks Gov. Jim Justice to veto the cancer creek bill if it comes to him. She's hopeful that kind of action has some impact.
get more stories like this via email
Oregonians have until July 22 to submit comments on the implementation of new environmental restrictions for the state's largest farms.
When the Oregon Legislature passed Senate Bill 85 last year, regulations were signed into law for Confined Animal Feeding Operations. Now, the Oregon Department of Agriculture is working to implement them.
Brian Posewitz, staff attorney for the group WaterWatch of Oregon, said the new rules will help protect one of Oregon's most important natural resources.
"All Oregonians should care about that, because all Oregonians should care about our water supplies, both in the streams and rivers as well as in the groundwater," Posewitz emphasized. "Because those water supplies are precious to everybody."
The regulations mean more closely monitoring the amount of water used by the large farms and considering the placement of the operations to reduce nitrate contamination in groundwater caused by manure. The move to protect Oregon's water supply coincides with an increase in demand for water as the state reenters its wildfire season.
As important as Oregon's water is, regulations often come with a price tag. Large ag operations could be more limited in their site selection, disposal of waste and use of water. The Oregon Farm Bureau predicted tougher rules will affect people's trips to the grocery store.
Lauren Poor, vice president of government and legal affairs for the bureau, thinks the new rules will make it harder to buy local, and wonders if the changes are justified.
"There wasn't a clear indication that there needed to be changes to this program to protect Oregon's waterways or Oregon's water supply," Poor contended.
According to Poor, the previous regulations were working, and continuously changing them can be difficult for producers. The deadline is July 22 to submit public comments to the Oregon Department of Agriculture before the regulations are finalized the end of this summer.
get more stories like this via email
The CEO of Austin Master Services - owner of a fracking-waste storage facility in Martin's Ferry, Ohio - will attend a hearing by phone today in Belmont County, facing contempt-of-court charges for failing to clean up 10,000 tons of waste - far beyond what the company was permitted to store.
Advocates and local officials continue to express concerns about the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' handling of toxic fracking waste and oversight of these types of facilities.
Beverly Reed, director and community organizer with the citizens' group Concerned Ohio River Residents, said they are on alert about potential water contamination - noting the facilities' proximity to the city's water supply and football field.
"When you have one of these facilities by a water supply, by where people recreate - anywhere, basically," said Reed, "it's concerning because of what's actually getting into the environment and what could be getting to water. "
ODNR spokesperson Karina Cheung said in an email that the agency is closely monitoring the situation and stands ready to clean up the facility if Austin Master Services fails to comply with the court's order - and that in April, before the court's contempt order, the Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management removed hundreds of barrels of liquid waste from the facility.
Fracking waste contains high levels of radium, volatile organic compounds, and at least one thousand chemicals.
Mayor of Martins Ferry John Davies argued that ODNR hasn't taken enough action to clean up the public health threat as quickly as possible.
"I'd like to see ODNR take responsibility, because they were responsible to permit the waste, and they're the ones that allowed it to go from 600 tons to 10,000 tons," said Davies. "The city has no jurisdiction. So I would like to see ODNR take control of the situation and clean it up."
Davies said he hopes the state shuts the facility down permanently, rather than issuing a new permit to potential waste storage companies that want to buy it.
"We do not want it re-permitted in the city of Martins Ferry," said Davies. "It's too close to our water source, and we're hoping that ODNR doesn't permit another company to enter the facility."
Davies added that the city continues to check it's water supply more frequently to ensure the community remains safe.
Disclosure: Fresh Water Accountability Project contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Clean-water advocates are heading to state district court after Colorado regulators turned their back on a judge's decision last year calling for better oversight of factory farm waste.
Tyler Lobdell, staff attorney for the group Food and Water Watch, explained human sewage goes through water treatment plants or septic systems. But he said operations where thousands of cattle are confined in concentrated spaces have been dumping millions of tons of untreated manure onto nearby fields.
"It inevitably overwhelms the landscape and overwhelms watersheds," Lobdell pointed out. "Such that this pollution has nowhere to go but into our drinking water and into our lakes, rivers and streams."
Last year's ruling found Colorado was in violation of state and federal law because the state's general permit did not require monitoring of water quality near factory farms. But the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment dismissed the ruling, arguing because there was no evidence of leaks, there was no need to monitor. Industry groups also claimed current regulations are tougher than in other states.
Lobdell countered Colorado's rules are strict, as they should be, to protect one of the state's most valuable assets, its water supplies. Without monitoring and enforcement of any violations, public health will continue to be at risk.
"You can have the strongest restrictions imaginable on paper," Lobdell noted. "The problem is those restrictions have been rendered largely meaningless because the facilities aren't required to report their compliance with those restrictions."
Factory farms, also called concentrated animal feeding operations, have faced growing scrutiny as corporate farming practices have replaced family-scale ranches. Such operations produce 17 million tons of manure a year in Colorado, according to the lawsuit, and many are located along the South Platte River.
Waste runoff from concentrated animal feeding operations contains fecal pathogens such as E. coli, antibiotics and cleaning chemicals. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus from manure can also produce toxic algae blooms in waterways capable of killing people, pets and livestock
get more stories like this via email